NEW YORK | 200 Greenwich - 2 WTC | 1,226 FT | 55 FLOORS

[pico44]

I think the first Foster design with the diamonds is the most stunning, obviously. But I can’t get over the fact that it just seems too flashy as rendered and doesn’t play nice with the other buildings, especially Rogers’s 3 (as built). Also, it is the one most susceptible to value engineering, which will be an issue once shovels hit the ground. Silverstein has proved this before. Minus points for ripping off that building in Chicago. Minus a couple more for the funky irregularities created by all the various angles at the top

I was a big fan of the Ingels design (HA!). The BIG proposal was all about WTC1, and creating an iconic partner to match the iconic simplicity of Child’s masterpiece (VE of base and spire aside). Already, One has become a staple of city silhouettes and drawings. Add in Ingels Two and it becomes nearly as easy to identify the city with a simple doodle as it was with the old twins. It would have been truly great. Probably my favorite of the three for that reason.

The alleged current design is probably my number two favorite—on first impression. It almost seems like an act of kindness between two old friends; because this design is all about WTC3. It elevates Three and makes it so so much better for the site—especially after the value engineering that neutered the power of Rogers initial vision. It also seems VE-proof (Foster seems to be figuring out how to work in New York). There are enough icons down there with Calatravas PATH station, WTC1, the memorial, and now REXs gorgeous Performing Arts Center. I think Foster understands that this space doesn’t need another masterpiece, it needs some string to hold it all together. Bravo

[Xing Lin]

I don't think anyone would build several detailed presentation models (the big one even has a button, presumably for LED lighting!) unless they were being paid to do it, i.e. Foster & Partners, especially since they're locked in as the design architect. The cluttered basement setting could be because it's an old model in long-term storage, or it's just making the rounds between offices of clients for presentation.

The "anonymous tipster" may not necessarily be connected with the design team and could just be someone who had shared access to the storage space while the model was there.

[BK1985]

Can we move on from talk of a twin? It’s not going to happen so there’s no point bringing it up in the thread for this building. Furthermore I don’t think you realize how much pain it elicits from some New Yorkers so please just stop.

[chris08876]

Off topic stuff deleted. Let's focus on 200 Greenwich and not hypotheticals or what ifs regarding an identical twin like 1 WTC being built (that's not happening BTW nor would it make financial sense as it would require the foundation to be constructed all over again). There is an original WTC thread in the buildings/architecture, post that type of material there.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

But I’m referring to financing. Even with 2.2m sf, Larry would need at least a 500k to 750k sf anchor. Maybe Amazon wound do it. They were looking for around 500k sf in JC.

As I recall, IBM also is looking for about 500k sf.

I'm curious what the cost is for 2 WTC or projected at the moment via Q4 2021. I recall the original foster design in 2020 figures costing close to 4 billion to build and also extended to the BIG design.

Two WTC could be a whopper in terms of cost, might even be the most expensive building to rise, even more than 1 WTC which was just shy of 4 billion. With rising labor and construction costs, I can see this one being a record breaker cost wise.

Presently 30 Hudson holds that record, something like 4 to 4.1 billion. Even more than 1 WTC but that's natural given the time frame of 1 WTC's rise and present costs/conditions.

[Crawford]

This looks promising. Certainly better than the original Foster design.

I never got why people liked the original Foster, which looked outdated from the day it was released, with its postmodern flourishes.

[Obadno]

I like the original diagonal tower most, but this is better than that horrendous stack of boxes

The entire trend of those "stack of boxes" and "lego" buildings are going to age horribly in my opinion.

[Kurtz]

I agree with those who see the freedom tower as a main tower that does not admit twin.
Back on topic it is true I agree with chris08876 I am curious about the cost of the current project (given the height I think the high performing materials will be used like concrete to have a strength of 14,000 pounds per square inch (psi)), I am also curious to see how this tower will look to those who cross the Brooklyn bridge.

[Bill Ditnow]

Originally Posted by Kurtz

I agree with those who see the freedom tower as a main tower that does not admit twin.
Back on topic it is true I agree with chris08876 I am curious about the cost of the current project (given the height I think the high performing materials will be used like concrete to have a strength of 14,000 pounds per square inch (psi)), I am also curious to see how this tower will look to those who cross the Brooklyn bridge.

On page 271, I think, someone did wonderful lifelike renderings of this tower with the others from a number of different vantage points, including the Brooklyn Bridge. From there the new tower would completely block the view of 1 World Trade, but that would be true of anything built there.

[Kurtz]

Originally Posted by Bill Ditnow

On page 271, I think, someone did wonderful lifelike renderings of this tower with the others from a number of different vantage points, including the Brooklyn Bridge. From there the new tower would completely block the view of 1 World Trade, but that would be true of anything built there.

I'm not sure, but this is not exactly the view from crossing the B. bridge



It would be nice to see both towers from Brooklyn Bridge

[Busy Bee]

Banal.

Overwrought.

Cowering.

Forgettable.


No magic to stir mens blood.

What a damn shame if this is the actual proposal.

[Bill Ditnow]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Banal.

Overwrought.

Cowering.

Forgettable.


No magic to stir mens blood.

What a damn shame if this is the actual proposal.

I agree. If you look at the renditions on page 271, with this tower fitted in with the existing three, all four towers, taken together, exemplify only bland corporate soulless sterility, imo. And none of them speak to 9/11, as was originally contemplated by the site plan.

[JMKeynes]

This would be absolutely amazing for Wolf's Point or anywhere in Chicago (or any other US city) but not at the WTC. In fact, I'd be very pleased if it were proposed for some shlock site on 5th or 6th (e.g., Barnett's 5th Ave and 46th St site). It's super lame for the WTC though.

[Busy Bee]

^ Interesting you mention Chicago because my first thought when I saw the model was it looked like some South Loop condo tower. It doesn't even really read like a commercial building with those setbacks, the look of a podium and the lack of a sculptural "broad stroke" in the design.

[JMKeynes]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

^ Interesting you mention Chicago because my first thought when I saw the model was it looked like some South Loop condo tower. It doesn't even really read like a commercial building with those setbacks, the look of a podium and the lack of a sculptural "broad stroke" in the design.

That’s true.

I really hope that this project fails like Foster’s original and BIG’s.

[Kurtz]

Impressive how similar is this tower to 270 park avenue one

[chris08876]

Credit: bmosborne

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

That’s true.

I really hope that this project fails like Foster’s original and BIG’s.

This design or model has a very Miami vibe to it. Just looks more in tune with the type of office that would rise in Miami. Doesn't feel NY in its design. I don't think it would be a good fit but if it did rise in this form, at least to finally get something in the last remaining WTC slot.

We might get a better idea if actual renderings come out versus just a model.

[JMKeynes]

That’s true, Chris, but it’s not saying much because while you and I love Miami, its new buildings largely suck.

[chris08876]

The one thing I could think of is that prospective tenants would be offered choices, this design or the original Foster. Both seem in tune with the present foundation. Might be just a way to spice up a 750k to 1 mil-sqft commitment. Just my thought process on this one.